chuck kottke

Absolutely! How many legs does a centipede really have?

Because the cans keep running away? :P

:)There there Carla - just lie down on the sofa for a while, and you'll recover! :) (and now I need to go do the same - fortunately, I only have a little bit of food - that limits the possibilities!)

I'm pulling them out of a hat. Ever since the rabbit left, there's all these little gems left behind!:P

Native Bird Calls

7:47 coming out of the sky.. and writing my acceptance speech to be King of Tasmania.

Zeppo: "What's new with the list of guests for the upcoming ball?" Groucho: "The list is complete, but ever since the ball landed in their court, they have refuse to send it back to our side. Now the ball could be indefinitely postponed, unless we can come up with a list of excuses to get it back!"

Led Zepplin!:P How many colors do gummi-bears come in?

Zeppo: "How many pop tabs would it take then to make a chain long enough to measure the earth's circumference?" Groucho: "I dunno. Who's keeping tabs, anyways?"

Today, I think this would be a top selling point! No promises, except the promise to work for the will of the people.. I don't see why not - by now, one would think the average citizen's level of cynicism is at an all-time high. Who wouldn't want to vote for an honest broker? You would face enormous sums of money spent on TV ads, radio spots, and the like, which makes it extremely difficult to succeed though.. That's where I think we need to start - by limiting the money behind the scenes - maybe even offer free air time, in exchange for the broadcaster's privilege of using the frequencies they do.

Either that, or there's a market shortage of smart people!:laugh3: As soon as there's a surplus, this graph could change..

Unless people start to speak up and act - true. We may be at that point. But the direction that takes is what I'm asking. It may need to be more sever before anyone takes corrective action, but then again, it seems as good a time as any to act. YES!! Getting the selection process to favor the honest candidates with the best ideas, not ones that work for the special interest groups - that's the question. If we use enough iron, we might find that the stack is stacked in favor of needles.;)

Yes, that is bizarre. The government could cash them in, but then it would only be paying itself in the end!:laugh3: Who dreamed up this creative accounting method??

Sure, people aren't happy - who can blame them! But picking from the other side of a revolving door doesn't change the way the door works. Maybe the choice they have made will be worse than before - it's happened before! Revolutions don't always come out for the better either. Roulette. It might have that effect - to wake people up - but is that alone enough to get incumbents to do the right thing? Hmm. It might, or it might not. Considering that the money falls towards both sides, no matter who gets in, they would have to be working against the money that backs them.. Yes, I would love for them to listen to our will! That's why I keep thinking an amendment to limit the money in politics might be the answer - to work against their moneyed backers sounds like a bit of long shot, given the nature of the machine.. Or should it be called The Matrix?

Zeppo: "You know we're all in this boat together, don't you?" Groucho: "Sure I do. And if you make the hull out of Swiss cheese, while it might sink faster, at least it will taste good going down." :laugh3:

I'm not asking to tax more - I agree we should tax less. I do however feel that the tax burden needs to be distributed more equitably, and the cuts need to be made where the most wasteful areas are. But taxing and spending less is only possible if the government is responsive to our will as citizens, is it not? How do we get to this point?

Well, then to reform it, what would truly work best? Unlikely as you say that Congress would limit their lobbyists, and outside of that then, what do you think would work? True - small and medium-sized companies started with the beginning, and some grew large and powerful over time. But given the size of these firms now, "too big to fail" means market forces can't truly work, and eliminate the bad actors. Breaking them up is Spitzer's argument, but would a congress beholden to them in part be willing to do that for the sake of the country? The comparisons of England & the U.S., vs. U.S. & China with the buying of debt might be part of the equation, but England began loosing colonies in Africa shortly after WWII, and was partly devastated from the effects of the war. Lots of other factors may have been involved as well. But if we are to limit spending to limit the need to sell bonds to China and elsewhere, then how best to accomplish that? And who is really buying the bulk of the U.S. bonds - the Chinese people, the Chinese government, or Chinese business owners?

Happy Birthday Chavi!! :jester::hat: I hope you have some fun!!

=the_gloaming09;3957201]I think that you need to take these lobbyists out. They keep adding in special interest programs within these bills which keeps creating more and more corruption. This has got to end soon because it will be one of the many reasons this country will fail. >>Well, how do we take the lobbyists out? Will Congress pass a law to keep them out? That's the question. I think spending needs to stop, and there needs to be smaller government. These bailouts (not all) but some were a big mistake... bailing out companies to save them that in return used that money to give bonuses. In some regard let the market go it's course, the companies that work right will flourish and the ones that don't will fail, as they should. >> Fair enough. But to limit spending, wouldn't we need to control the feedback loop that keeps demanding spending on certain things, and then feeds money back into politics? If we hadn't had the bailouts, the claim is that the whole economy here would have collapsed, and with it the global economy. Perhaps the firms are too big to fail - and have dis-economies of scale? One suggestion (by Eliot Spitzer) was to break up the big firms, to limit their concentration of power, and create real competition between the new "banks". Would this be possible, and how?

Different story, same year. Root causes - getting to them, fixing them - fixes a host of maladies. Why is it that a group of Baptists who might have abducted (mistakenly or not) some non-orphaned youngsters in Haiti, while that's an important right's issue - why does that overshadow the real life and death drama of getting water, food, medicine, medical treatment, sanitation, and other necessities to those desperately in need? I can't understand the priorities. It's as though the people who decide what's newsworthy are too far above reality and empathy to get it. Soap opera drama takes precedent over critical life and death issues..

Here's the problem: money in politics in the U.S. It's gummed things up pretty badly, led to the economic problems we still face globally, and created a number of feedback loops that feed money back to those who pump money into politics. We may have even set things up for a bigger house of cards in the future. One proposed solution is to limit the effect of money in politics by amending the U.S. Constitution via an act of Congress; another is to pass legislation to fix the problem; a third is to call a Constitutional Convention, giving citizens and state legislatures the power to amend the Constitution. What do you think would work the best, and why? Here are some opinions on the matter for background information, if you're interested:Video: How to Get Our Democracy Back Constitutional Framework « Gryphon's Aerie

:laugh3: This would be like collecting thousands of pop tabs to make chains - achievements of other sorts may be more meaningful!;) But it's fun, so what the heck.;)

I can't believe there isn't a shortage of it!!:laugh3: Not much of it escapes from Europe - I think they corner it in the wild, and devour it before it even gets on the ship!:P It's quite delicious ivet - just hazel nuts ground up with sugar, chocolate, and some palm kernel oil? Remembering the ingredients now..

Stephen Colbert won a Grammy, and he was spoon feeding it pudding!:laugh3: So, something went right at the Grammy Awards!:P

Weed out the pronouns, and you've got it made!! And just how are we feeling today. That's good! Now look at the rauschenberg print, and tell me what you see.. Hmm.. Very Interesting! A pickup truck that says "our baby" on the side! Very good, very good! And what else. Oh, is that your we baby? WHee!:laugh3: I think I need a beer! Let's share! Our beer is better than "my" beer!